Recruiting Retaining a Competitive Workforce

1 Recruiting & retaining a competitive workforce
Spotlight on: European employers 2014
Recruiting & retaining
a competitive workforce
Pharma, biotech and medical devices

2 Recruiting & retaining a competitive workforce 3
Introduction
Methodology
Employer perceptions and their impact on
recruitment and retention
The commercial environment
The recruitment market
Recruitment trends and challenges
Tailoring the employer proposition
The international question
Paying attention to retention
Conclusion
Salary and market trends
Clinical Operations
Research & Development
Quality Assurance
Regulatory Affairs
Pharmacovigilance & Drug Safety
Medical Affairs
Health Economics & Outcomes Research
Business Intelligence & Data/Biometrics
Sales & Marketing
Medical Communications
Operations
Contents
6
7
12
20
22
27
31
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
53

Methodology
This report is based on the European results of our worldwide
employer survey, conducted with over 200 leading pharma, biotech
and medical devices organisations from across the world. Participants
ranged from small start ups and SMEs, to some of the world’s largest
pharma and medical devices companies.
Further industry insight is based on the perceptions and experiences
shared by European pharma, biotech and medical devices companies
at our series of roundtables, held across the UK, France, Germany,
Belgium and the Netherlands. The roundtables were attended by
senior decision-makers, including representatives from leading
organisations. Addressing the key themes raised by employees across
the industry in 2013, our roundtables explored the impact of changing
employee expectations, together with the impact of an increasingly
competitive and global marketplace as organisations look to build
sustainable workforces.
Introduction
The pharma, biotech and medical devices sectors continue to face
significant change. Increased competition, tightening regulations and
increased global expansion are all impacting salaries, benefits and the
ability of organisations to build sustainable workforces.
In this report we explore how organisations are managing the
changing expectations and perceptions highlighted by employees in
our 2013 report; from increased market confidence and willingness to
move jobs, to an increasingly migratory talent pool. We also examine
employers’ drivers for the future, together with how organisations plan
to recruit and retain talent.
Drawing on insight from our global employer survey, series of
international roundtables and the experience of our network of
dedicated recruitment specialists, this report looks at the factors
affecting employers across the industry and helps to understand what
companies need to do to recruit and retain a competitive workforce.

As we look at the recruitment and retention trends impacting
the pharma, biotech and medical devices sectors across
Europe, we explore the commercial environment and its impact
on organisations across the industry. By first understanding
the commercial motivations of firms for the year ahead, we can
further examine the impact on supply and demand of talent as
organisations look to build sustainable workforces for the
long-term.
With that in mind we asked pharma, biotech and medical
devices organisations from across Europe what their
main commercial objectives were for the next few years.
Unsurprisingly, we see increasing market share as the main
objective for both organisations across the pharma & biotech
(70.8%) and the medical devices sectors (73.1%).
This may, in part, be reflective of the fact that the top 10
pharma organisations still account for less than 50% of the
global pharma market, despite the series of large mergers
and acquisitions seen over the past decade. What is evident
across the sector is an increasing desire for organisations to
increase their share of the market, and not just the big pharma
companies but a rising number of smaller biotechs who have
seen growing opportunities to increase their foothold in the
industry – both across the domestic markets and within the
emerging markets.
As organisations aim to secure greater market share we see
increasing diversification, particularly as big pharma looks to
compensate for the loss of exclusivity on many of the
blockbusters following the patent cliff. With less than five drugs
reaching ‘blockbuster’ status in the last few years it appears
the days of reliance on a single product may be reaching an
end. In fact as the market sees growth across diagnostics and
a number of firms moving into devices, many organisations are
broadening their portfolios in order to not only maintain but to
extend their market share. It therefore comes as no surprise
that organic growth is a key objective for nearly a third (30.6%)
of the pharma & biotech organisations we spoke to.
The continued impact of the patent cliff has also meant
generics have continued to see high growth, not just across
Europe but also across markets such as Japan, where
increased cost efficiencies are driving their use. As pharma
& biotechs look to maximise the growth seen across emerging
markets organisations are having to diversify and develop lower
cost products to meet the needs of patients in these developing
economies. Medical devices organisations continue to lead
the way in this regard and have already shown an increasing
ability to adapt and manufacture low cost products specifically
for these regions. So much so that new product development
has become a key commercial objective for 61.1% of pharma
& biotech organisations and 69.2% of medical devices
organisations.
With ambitious plans in place there is no doubt there will be a
significant impact on organisations’ recruitment and retention
strategies as they gear up to maximise their market.
Intentions to recruit
Examining the medical devices sector we see that 84.6%
of organisations are either definitely looking to recruit or are
considering it in 2014. With five of the ten largest medical
devices markets located in western Europe; Germany, France,
the UK, Italy and Spain, and growth in the largest markets
expected to continue at an average annual rate of 1.6% until
2018, it perhaps comes as no surprise that medical devices
organisations are looking to bolster their workforce with a view
to achieving their long-term commercial objectives.
Across the pharma & biotech sector we see a similar picture,
with levels of employer market confidence mirroring those
of medical devices organisations. As a result 83.3% of
organisations are either considering or definitely planning to
recruit in 2014.
A confident market
In early 2013 we spoke to thousands of pharma, biotech
and medical devices professionals throughout Europe, to
understand their motivations for the year ahead and their
perceptions of the job market. Confidence was particularly high
in the Netherlands where almost 95% (94.1%) of employees
said they had no real concerns surrounding job security. The
Dutch were not alone in this feeling of general confidence
though. In fact, across Europe we saw confidence reach its
highest level than at any time in recent years with 85.4% of
people saying they had no real concerns for their job security,
and 16.5% of respondents even going as far as to say they
were ‘very confident’.
One employer reflected this mood at our UK roundtable when
they said they had seen a distinct shift in employee confidence
over the past year.
A participant in Belgium suggested that in the light of
organisational changes seen across the sector, employers
have extended the scope and remit of employees’ roles
and as a result employees have taken on larger roles than
ever before, and now feel indispensable to some degree.
He even went as far as to say ‘Look at my role, I do the job
of four people, so naturally I feel very secure in my job.’
What we saw emerge last year was a distinct perception
that employees felt safe in their current jobs and felt they
had a good platform from which to seek their next role.
Considering that in 2013 almost three quarters (74.1%) of
European employees were either ‘likely’ or ‘extremely likely’
to look for a new role in the 12 months ahead, we asked
organisations whether they had seen this intention translate
to employees leaving and whether there had been an
associated impact on the talent available.
The commercial environment The recruitment market
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
70.8
55.6
31.9 30.6
38.9
61.1
13.9
20.8
73.1
42.3
34.6 34.6 34.6
38.5
69.2
15.4
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
Increase
market share
Increase
competitiveness
Protect market
share
Expansion
through organic
growth
Expansion
through merger
or acquisition
Expansion into
new international
markets
Expansion into
new disciplines
e.g. medical
devices/biologics
Develop new
products
What are your commercial objectives/goals for the next 3 years?
Are you looking to recruit over the next 12 months?
Yes
No
Maybe
Yes
No
Maybe
Medical Devices
26.9%
15.4%
22.2%
Pharma &
Biotech
16.7%
61.1%
57.7%
%
4 out of 5 organisations
plan on bolstering their workforce to
meet their commercial objectives in
the next year.”

Areas in demand
As organisations look to increase their market share and
improve market competitiveness through broadening their
portfolios, it follows suit that the development of new products
is high on the agenda of both pharma & biotechs and medical
devices organisations. What’s more with organisations facing
the increasing challenges of being able to move quickly and
successfully launch new products, we see a direct impact on
demand for talent across a number of key disciplines.
Quality Assurance was tied as the most popular area for
pharma & biotech companies recruiting in 2014, with 43.2%
of respondents saying this was a particular growth area. This
growth was not limited to just the pharma & biotech sector
though. We also saw 46.7% of medical devices organisations
focusing their recruitment activity in this area.
This growth is to be expected as it’s driven
largely by the continued tightening of EU
regulations. With allegations over the last
few years of ‘significant and systemic’
quality control failings, we have also
seen organisations come under
greater scrutiny by the FDA, which
has led many companies to invest
significantly in QA.
Similarly a series of high profile
product scares within the medical
devices industry has also led the
industry to tighten its guidelines which
has created increased demand across the
discipline.
Sales and Marketing is an area facing significant
change and companies are evolving these functions to
enable them to adapt to meet changes in the market, so much
so that sales and marketing was tied with QA as the key focus
for 43.2% of pharma & biotech organisations in 2014.
As firms have moved away from the traditional sales force
structure, we have seen the sales and marketing function
evolve as organisations now face multiple new routes to
market. This has included the growing direct-to-consumer
market, where we have already seen communication
between patients and many pharma, biotech and medical
devices organisations growing which has been impacted
by the growth of consumer focused strategies.
As consumers become more proactive in how they manage
their health, patients have also become much more
influential. With a culture increasingly centred around social
media this is having a significant impact on organisations.
On the whole companies appear to have been slow to
react to new communications channels such as these but
many regard it as a key driver for the future.
Regulatory Affairs was the number one growth area for
53.3% of medical devices organisations and a key area for
pharma & biotech organisations, across Europe
(40.9%). This growth is largely to be expected as
medical devices firms look to not only release
new, innovative products but to extend
the reach of their existing product lines.
Tightening regulations across the
medical devices sector, bringing it
more in line with the pharma & biotech
sector have also driven this growth
exponentially, and we have seen
demand for regulatory affairs
specialists within medical devices rise
as a result.
The outsourcing trend seen over recent
years has also continued to build
momentum across regulatory affairs, with
the pharma CRO outsourcing market estimated
to be worth $40.5 billion in 2014. In fact, according
to research, 68% of Europe’s pharma organisations were
outsourcing at least part of their regulatory affairs function
in 2013 and with many processes such as medical writing,
regulatory data management and regulatory information
management ideal for outsourcing many organisations are
following suit. All of which has led to a variety of resourcing
options for organisations looking to strengthen this area.
A shallower talent pool?
Given that motivation to move roles was very high in 2013, less
than a fifth of organisations across Europe felt this had been
reflected in the market; a feeling that was shared across both
pharma & biotech (19.5%) and medical devices (19.2%). This
suggests that whilst the intention to consider a new role was
strong, in reality this has translated to a lower proportion of
people actively entering the job market than anticipated. The
fact the almost half of all medical devices companies (47.2%)
and pharma & biotech organisations (50.0%) actually felt the
available talent pool had stayed the same when compared to
the previous year, directly contradicts what we saw employees
saying last year.
Somewhat surprisingly almost a third of both pharma
& biotechs (33.3%) and medical devices organisations
(30.8%) felt the size of the available talent pool had actually
decreased, and that their recruitment plans have been directly
impacted. We explore in subsequent sections of the report how
organisations are facing this challenge.
How likely are you to look for a new role in the next 12 months? European employee perspective 2013
In the past 12 months do you think the available
talent pool has:
Decreased
Increased
Stayed the same
Decreased
Increased
Stayed the same
Pharma &
Biotech
19.2%Medical Devices
How confident do you feel about your job security? European employee perspective 2013
Growth disciplines:
• Quality Assurance
• Regulatory Affairs
• Sales & Marketing
• R & D
Very confidentNeither confident
nor worried
Very concerned
Quite confidentQuite concerned
44.5%24.4%8.6%6.0%
Extremely likelyUnlikely
LikelyExtremely unlikely
36.3%37.8%20.5%5.4%
16.5%
19.5%
33.3%
30.8%
50.0%
47.2%

Research and development also featured high on the list of
growth areas for our panel, with 34.1% of pharma & biotechs
and 46.7% of medical devices companies planning on
recruiting in this area in 2014. R&D has faced a big mountain
over recent years, with the patent cliff and the restructures that
have occurred throughout Europe, however, with a renewed
strategic focus we are beginning to see R&D growth accelerate
once more.
Although in November 2013 Fitch Ratings said it expected
R&D to continue to show restraint with regards to spending, it
acknowledged that most cuts had already been made. Indeed
our research showed that for almost half of the organisations in
our panel, change had already occurred and investment in R&D
is likely to increase in 2014. This optimism is shared across the
industry with early indications showing new investment may
take the sector some way to achieving the value seen in 2011,
when European R&D spend across pharma was worth an
estimated EUR 29 billion.
Which disciplines are you recruiting for?
34.1
25.0
31.8
43.2
40.9
29.5
9.1
43.2
25.0
18.2
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
46.7
26.7
46.7
53.3
33.3
20.0
6.7
13.3
20.0
40.0
R&D
Clinical
Operations
Quality
Assurance
Pharmacovigilance
anddrugsafety
Regulatory
Affairs
Medical
Affairs
HEOR
Business
Intelligence
andData
Sales&
Marketing
Operations
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
%
The balance between contract and perm
Although 40.0% of those medical devices firms ‘definitely’
looking to recruit are opting to bring in talent for the long-term
and are focusing solely on permanent hires, we are also seeing
an increasing tendency for organisations across the medical
devices sector to take a blended approach to recruitment. In
fact, over half of our European medical devices panel (53.3%)
said they would be looking to recruit on both a permanent and
contract/interim basis in 2014.
The changing landscape across the medical devices sector
perhaps goes some way to account for the adoption of
this approach, which means that organisations can build
strategic teams for the short, mid and long-term. It also allows
organisations to secure talent and intellectual property for the
future, whilst adding extra flexibility and allowing organisations
to scale their workforce, as and when projects demand. By
doing so employers can keep fixed headcount costs low which
is clearly a benefit during periods of change.
Across the pharma & biotech sector we see a slightly
different picture. Whilst we see similar levels of employer
market confidence and plans to recruit (83.3% of
organisations are either considering or definitely plan to
recruit in 2014), we see a preference for permanent talent.
In fact, over half (54.5%) of organisations looking to recruit
in 2014 intend to focus only on permanent recruitment.
With competition fierce across a number of disciplines
and talent in short supply, we also see an increasing
preference for organisations to on-board new permanent
talent quickly in order to lock in talent and prevent future
skill gaps. We also see organisations reviewing their
retention policies in order to safeguard their
organisation’s best people. This is particularly pertinent
considering that 74.1% of people in 2013 said they were
likely to look for a new role.
That being said, demand for contractors remains steady
as firms look to build flexibility into their organisations.
Whilst only 4.6% of pharma & biotech organisations are
planning to recruit on a contract basis alone, we see
continued interest in adopting a blended approach with
40.9% looking to recruit on both a permanent and contract
basis.
If the intent to recruit over the next year, whether on a
permanent or contract basis, translates into action we
could see a potential re-emergence of the war for talent,
not just within Europe, but globally. As demand rises we
anticipate shrinking talent pools, and as a result salaries
will grow over the next few years.
40.9%
Perm only
Contract/interim only
Both
Pharma &
Biotech
54.5%
4.6%
Perm only
Contract/interim only
Both
40.0%
6.7%
Medical Devices
On what basis are you looking to recruit?
53.3%
To find outthe
impact of sector changes
and a changing industry
landscape on supply, demand
and salaries across each
discipline please refer to the
salaries and market trends
section of this report.

The question of money
It will come as little surprise to some that increasing salary
and bonus expectations topped the list of factors employers
felt were impacting their recruitment and retention strategies,
with half (50.0%) of all pharma, biotech and medical devices
companies stating they have seen rising expectations – both
within their existing workforce and when attracting new talent.
However, despite seeing a rise in expectations first hand and
even though 88.6% of pharma, biotech and medical devices
employees in 2013 considered salary the most critical factor
when looking for a new job, salaries do not appear to be a
key concern for organisations when recruiting. In fact only a
quarter (25.0%) of pharma & biotech organisations felt their
ability to compete on salaries and benefits was a concern
for the future. Whether this is reflective of rising employer
confidence surrounding the strength of their financial
packages, or a sign of tacit acknowledgement that although
salary is a key factor, sometimes an organisation’s hands are
tied in terms of what they are able, or willing, to offer has yet
to be determined.
Our European events would seem to indicate the latter, as we
saw in the UK when one participant commented: ‘We know
we often can’t compete on salary, so we look at our strengths
and what we can compete on instead. For us it’s our training
programmes and our culture of development.’
In Germany, our panel highlighted that salary and benefits are
not always necessarily the answer to attracting the right talent,
nor retaining them: ‘Sometimes it doesn’t come down to salary
When recruiting which of the following trends have you seen?
Recruitment trends and challenges
50
40
30
20
10
0
40.3
30.8 30.8
50.0
42.3
46.2
42.3
34.7
43.1
44.4
47.2
50.0
Increasingpoolof
internationaltalent
Increasingnumberof
contractorsavailable
Increasingsalaryand
bonusexpectations
Increasingexpectations
surroundingwork/life
balanceand
flexiblebenefits
Lackofskilled
professionalson
themarket
Increasedcompetition
forthebestpeople
%
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
When recruiting what challenges/issues does your organisation face?
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
51.4
4.2 4.2
5.6
48.6
50.0
25.0
8.3
18.1
44.4
12.5
3.8
7.7
65.4
50.0
46.2
34.6
26.9
19.2
30.8
19.2
0.0
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
%
Lackof
localtalent
Competitionfor
localtalent
fromabroad
Competitionfor
internationaltalent
Competitionfor
besttalent
Lackofskilled
talentavailable
Abilitytocompete
onsalaryand
financialbenefits
Abilitytocompeteon
flexiblebenefits/training/
companyculture
Abilitytocompete
basedonemployer
reputation/brand
Targetingthe
rightpeople
Managingthe
recruitmentprocess
None–wedon’t
haveanychallenges
and winning talent on this basis. It’s more important that the
person understands what we are able to offer and looks at the
value of that, alongside the financial package on offer, so that
they are bought into the company and are not just with us for
the money.’
For over a third (34.6%) of our European medical devices
panel the ability to compete based on financial packages
appears to be more of a concern though. As a result we see
more employers taking measures to address this concern, with
30.8% of organisations planning on increasing salaries in order
to compete for talent. This rise in salaries may be driven in
part by the increasing need for medical devices organisations
to compete with other industries for talent. For example in
Germany we see firms struggle to attract the required numbers
of engineers due to high level of competition seen from sectors
such as automotive and aerospace, where salary is proving
influential.
Similarly, with tightening regulations surrounding medical
devices, we are seeing the medical devices sector moving
more in line with the pharma & biotech sector, increasing
competition for QPs and quality assurance professionals.
This is placing additional pressure on what many
organisations already consider a limited pool of talent and
as medical devices look to compete with pharma & biotech
organisations in some areas salaries are being driven up.
It’s clear that firms that fail to adequately benchmark their
financial packages and consider the rising expectations
of employees could struggle when it comes to effectively
attracting and competing for talent.

How important are the following factors when looking for a new role? European employee perspective 2013
Work/life balance and flexible benefits
It’s not just expectations surrounding salary and financial
packages that are rising though; according to 43.1% of
pharma & biotechs and 42.3% of medical devices
organisations expectations surrounding work/life balance
and flexible benefits are also on the increase. In fact
medical devices organisations ranked this change in
expectations as the third biggest factor affecting the
recruitment market.
At our UK roundtable one participant reiterated this when
they said: ‘People now want a work/life blend. It’s about
how the two fit together and work in harmony. That means
bringing flexibility into the organisation which can be hard’.
This trend reflects the perceptions shared by employees across
the industry in 2013, when 62.0% of employees considered
flexible working either ‘important’ or ‘extremely important’
when looking for their next role. In Germany our roundtable
participants highlighted that offering flexible working in the
form of home working can be advantageous to the company,
particularly if they are based in locations that may not be a
prime attraction.
One participant said ‘We offer home working to everyone from
the start. In the past our office location has proved a drawback
when looking to attract the best talent and we’ve found that by
offering more flexibility we can widen our choice of people. If
our people spend less time commuting it also means they have
more time for their work which benefits us.’
At our UK roundtable though one participant highlighted the
potential restrictions of home working policies; ‘We went too
far the other way and gave people too much freedom to work
from home. We found that as a small, growing organisation we
needed people to be closer. Change is happening rapidly and
we need to remain close knit to ensure everyone is working
towards the same commercial objectives.’
Despite varying opinions on the best way to manage a flexible
working policy employers are still confident about this area of
their offering. Over half (58.3%) of pharma & biotechs and half
(50.0%) of medical devices companies considered one of their
strengths to be their ability to offer a good work/life balance
and flexible working. Reflecting on the criteria employees
in 2013 deemed ‘important’ or ‘very important’ to their job
search, we see that for almost two thirds (62.0%) of employees
work/life balance and flexible working were considered key.
The fact that a number of organisations consider their offering
in this area to be strong suggests that employers are adapting
their proposition accordingly.
Rising expectations
surrounding work/life balance and
flexible benefits are impacting over
40% of organisations.”
Salary
Location
Flexible working
Benefit package
Bonus
Opportunities for career progression
Company culture
Scope of role/projects
Job security
*Based on respondents who considered factor
‘important’ or ‘very important.’
88.6%
80.0%
62.0%
61.2%
54.2%
78.6%
81.6%
75.1%
68.8%

What are your strengths when recruiting?
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
50.0
58.3
22.2
18.1
40.3 40.3
30.8
50.0
15.4
23.1
46.2
53.8
%
Offercompetitive
financialpackage
Offergoodwork/life
balanceandflexible
working
Knowwhereto
looktofindthe
besttalent
Successfully
outsource
recruitment
OffergoodL&D
andcareer
development
opportunities
Strongemployer
brand/desirable
placetowork
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
Lack of local talent and the availability
of skilled talent
With competition for talent considered one of the main
challenges for organisations across Europe, it perhaps comes
as little surprise that almost half of all organisations feel there
is a lack of available skilled talent (50.0% pharma & biotech
and 46.2% medical devices), and in particular a lack of local
talent (51.4% pharma & biotech and 50.0% medical devices).
Whether it is the case that employers’ expectations and the
skills being sought are unrealistic, or whether it is simply that
the talent in the market can not meet the growing levels of
demand has yet to be determined.
When we look at how companies plan on combating this
lack of talent, we see that companies are turning their
attention internally with over half of all pharma & biotech
organisations (56.7%) and almost half (46.2%) of medical
devices organisations focusing on developing internal talent.
One employer at our UK event cautioned; ‘Don’t assume
employees aren’t interested in progression just because
they’re not the most competitive person. It’s about spotting
those with high potential and nurturing them. If given the
right opportunities they can then prove a long-term asset
for the business.’ Our panel in France agreed, highlighting
the value of ‘high performer’ schemes to identify top talent.
In disciplines such as quality assurance where experienced
talent is at a premium we are also seeing organisations
developing talent at the junior level in order to fill immediate
skills gaps, whilst initiating clear learning and development
programmes in order to build a pipeline of talent for the future.
With 78.6% of employees in 2013 considering career
progression either ‘important’ or ‘extremely important’ when
considering a new role and a further 81.6% considering the
scope of their role critical, employers cannot afford to neglect
the internal development of their existing workforce if they
plan on retaining them. Those organisations with clear internal
development programmes stand to not only maximise the
efficiency of their top performers and develop a workforce
with well-rounded skill sets, but also to make themselves more
attractive to new recruits.
This approach is already evident across some organisations.
A leading, international organisation at our UK roundtable
said; ‘Learning and development opportunities are a key
part of our offering. We know career progression is
important to the type of people we want in our organisation
and we see their eyes light up during the interview process
when we discuss our approach to developing employees.
We offer good exposure across a range of disciplines, this
means our attrition is low, and if we do lose talent it’s likely
to be because of other factors.’
When recruiting what challenges/issues does your organisation face?
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
51.4
4.2 4.2
5.6
48.6
50.0
25.0
8.3
18.1
44.4
12.5
3.8
7.7
65.4
50.0
46.2
34.6
26.9
19.2
30.8
19.2
0.0
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
%
Lackof
localtalent
Competitionfor
localtalent
fromabroad
Competitionfor
internationaltalent
Competitionfor
besttalent
Lackofskilled
talentavailable
Abilitytocompete
onsalaryand
financialbenefits
Abilitytocompeteon
flexiblebenefits/training/
companyculture
Abilitytocompete
basedonemployer
reputation/brand
Targetingthe
rightpeople
Managingthe
recruitmentprocess
None–wedon’t
haveanychallenges

What steps have you taken/do you plan to take to address your recruitment challenges? In addition to focusing on developing internal talent, 47.8%
of pharma & biotech organisations and 42.3% of medical
devices companies say they are now adopting ‘a more flexible
recruitment policy’. A fifth (20.9%) of pharma & biotech
organisations have said they would look for talent outside their
industry/sector. An employer at our Netherlands roundtable
commented; ‘Whilst we are looking at other avenues for
recruitment, it often feels as if we are still looking for the
proverbial “sheep with five legs”. We’ve therefore had to relax
our criteria for new hires to some degree.’
The adaptation of employer propositions
demonstrates an increasingly flexible
approach by some organisations as
they look to meet the demands of
employees. With the emergence
of a more demanding workforce,
particularly generation Y employees,
employers will need to continue to
review and flex their offering if they
are to remain competitive.
An employer at our Germany
roundtable also highlighted the
increasing expectation of their
generation Y workforce for the
organisation to adapt their offering to
suit the individual’s specific needs. He
commented; ‘We look to provide flexibility in
our offering and to be responsive to our employees.
The challenge is how to make sure individual arrangements are
comparable and competitive with the external market’.
Competition
The threat of competition continues to be a key factor
impacting the recruitment market, so much so that
increased competition for the best people was the second
highest factor affecting pharma & biotech organisations
(47.2%), and was ranked joint third by medical devices
companies (42.3%). It therefore follows that competition for
the best talent was unsurprisingly at the top of the list of
challenges for organisations across both pharma & biotech
(48.6%) and medical devices (65.4%).
If we look at specific disciplines, including quality
assurance and regulatory affairs, where demand remains
high, we see a clear distinction between the talent sought
by pharma & biotech, and medical devices organisations.
Whilst some skill sets remain transferable between
sectors, the nature of the roles and product portfolios
have continued to make specialists with relevant sector
experience crucial to many firms. Whilst it would appear
to be a safe assumption pharma & biotech organisations
are competing for the same talent, it is becoming apparent
that whilst organisations may well be competing for people
with the same skill sets on paper, this isn’t as clear
cut as it would first appear. In fact, our
roundtables across Europe indicated clear
differences in the type of people
organisations are looking to recruit.
Our UK and France roundtables
suggested that big pharmas are
fishing from a different talent pool
than smaller organisations and CROs,
and that company culture and the
scope of roles are proving key when
on-boarding the right talent.
One participant from a leading big pharma
said; ‘We’re always looking for people for the
long-term. We’re not looking for ultra competitive
individuals, but people that can fit a team culture
and have the commercial acumen to help progress the
organisation.’ In contrast smaller pharma & biotechs and
CROs are looking for competitive, ‘go-getters’ who will fit
the highly commercial nature of their growing businesses.
Despite the differences in employee profiles, employers
acknowledge that there are no hard and fast rules
surrounding the people they recruit, and that the threat of
competition from likeminded organisations remains a
challenge as they look to recruit. As companies look to
address this challenge we see their attention increasingly
turning to their recruitment approach and employer
proposition as they look to differentiate themselves as an
employer of choice.
Competitionfor the
best talent is the biggest
challenge affecting over
45% of employers.”
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
Look internationally for talent
Adopt a more flexible recruitment policy
Increase salaries
Extend benefit packages
Develop internal talent
Look for talent outside industry sector
Outsource recruitment
Nothing
17.9%
56.7%
20.9%
31.3%
47.8%
19.4%
22.4%
9.0%
Look internationally for talent
Adopt a more flexible recruitment policy
Increase salaries
Extend benefit packages
Develop internal talent
Look for talent outside industry sector
Outsource recruitment
Nothing
19.2%
46.2%
0%
34.6%
42.3%
30.8%
15.4%
7.7%

With more job opportunities in the market, specialists across
a number of disciplines have found themselves in the enviable
position of having multiple options and being able to demand
more from their employer. It is therefore those companies able
to offer the most competitive salaries, or with the stronger,
more defined employer proposition that are able to compete
more effectively.
Whilst almost a third (30.8%) of pharma & biotech
organisations and a fifth (19.4%) of medical devices
organisations say they plan on increasing salaries in order
to address the threat of increasing competition, employer
propositions are by no means based on salary and financial
packages alone. Instead organisations are looking at how
they can leverage their wider offering.
Over half (53.8%) of medical devices organisations considered
their employer brand to be their strongest attribute when
recruiting. In contrast only 40.3% of pharma & biotech
organisations felt their reputation as a ‘desirable place to work’
was one of their core strengths. As we saw last year, when
considering what constitutes their employer brand and offering,
firms need to take into account more than just the strength of
their name and reputation alone. Employer brands are built on
both the perceptions of existing employees and the external
market so every touchpoint of the recruitment and retention
process needs to be considered.
For example, organisations are embracing their cultural
differences and are using these as a way to attract talent.
At our UK roundtable, participants from pharma organisations
discussed how, as small growing organisations where change
is rapid, it is easy to demonstrate to potential employees the
potential growth and career development opportunities if they
were to join the company.
Tailoring the employer proposition
What steps have you taken/do you plan to take to address your recruitment challenges?
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
%
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
Look
internationally
for talent
Extend benefit
packages
Increase
salaries
Outsource
recruitment
Develop
internal talent
Adopt a
more flexible
recruitment
policy
Look for talent
outside
industry/sector
Nothing
17.9
19.4
22.4
31.3
56.7
47.8
20.9
0.0
19.2
15.4
30.8
34.6
46.2
42.3
7.7
9.0
Our France roundtable echoed this sentiment with a participant
from a biotech saying; ‘Working in a biotech or smaller
organisation proves very attractive to some people. If they
are looking for a broader role and a dynamic, challenging
environment the culture of a biotech may well suit them better.
By putting this at the heart of our recruitment proposition we
can ensure we get the right people on board from the start.’
In contrast we see the big pharmas using the draw of the
strength of an international and highly structured organisation
to their benefit; promoting the full scope of their learning and
development opportunities and the resources at the employees’
disposal.
In Belgium one panellist said; ‘We understand employee
attitudes are different, particularly those of new starters and
graduates. They aren’t planning to be in the company for
life, it’s all about stepping stones and how they can develop
during their time with us. That’s why when we recruit for
these positions we promote a clear career path and show
promotion opportunities and how these are linked to salary
increases.’
As we saw in 2013 employees have higher expectations
than ever and a ‘one-size-fits-all’ employer proposition is
not enough if organisations are to compete for talent across
a range of disciplines. A diverse talent pool means tailoring
the employer position, understanding both the needs of
potential and existing employees, and knowing which
aspects of the employer offering will prove the most
attractive and drawing these out effectively.
What are your strengths when recruiting?
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
50.0
58.3
22.2
18.1
40.3 40.3
30.8
50.0
15.4
23.1
46.2
53.8
%
Offer competitive
financial package
Offer good work/
life balance and
flexible working
Know where to
look to find the
best talent
Successfully
outsource
recruitment
Offer good L&D
and career
development
opportunities
Strong employer
brand/desirable
place to work
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices

How likely are you to recruit international talent?
The international question
As organisations across both the pharma & biotech and the
medical devices sectors look to address the key challenges
of scarcity of talent and competition, attention is increasingly
turning to the international recruitment market as firms look to
access a wider talent pool. The fact that over a third of both
pharma & biotechs (37.5%) and medical devices companies
(34.6%) are already recruiting international talent, or have
definitive plans to in the near future, is testament to some
organisations taking an increasingly flexible approach to
recruitment. What’s more with a further 25.0% of pharma
& biotech organisations and 23.1% of firms across medical
devices ‘considering’ sourcing talent internationally the
picture emerging is of an increasingly global recruitment
market.
If we look back to 2013 and the perceptions shared by
employees across the industry, we see almost three quarters
(74.2%) of European employees would be receptive to the idea
of relocating internationally; indicating that employees’ and
organisations’ expectations are becoming aligned. Looking
outside Europe we also saw 89.7% of pharma & biotech and
medical devices employees across South East Asia and 58.0%
of US employees open to relocating. Of those 62.5% of South
East Asian specialists and 39.3% of US specialists said Europe
was an attractive option when considering locations.
This is a positive sign for those European organisations
open to sourcing talent internationally. With organisations
showing flexibility around which regions they would
consider recruiting from there is clear potential for employers
to access a worldwide pool of talent. Whilst Europe remains
the region of choice for 93.3% of pharma, biotech and
medical devices organisations, due mainly to the ease of
relocation within Europe and the transferability of skills and
experience, there is also keen interest in both US and
Asia Pac talent. In fact, over half of pharma & biotechs and
medical devices organisations would consider US talent
(46.7% and 53.3%), and almost a third would consider
talent from across Asia Pac (26.7% and 33.3%).
Likely
- considering recruiting
international talent
Likely
- considering
recruiting
international talent
Certain
- already recruiting international
talent/plan to in the future
Certain
- already recruiting
international talent/
plan to in the future
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
Never
- recruiting
international
talent is not
an option
Never
- recruiting
international
talent is not
an option
Unlikely
- not currently considering
recruiting international talent
Unlikely
- not currently considering
recruiting international talent
We haven’t
considered it
We haven’t
considered it
37.5%25.0%6.9%27.8%2.8%
34.6%15.4%15.4% 23.1%11.5%
With interest in relocating internationally so high it would
appear organisations may have their pick of talent, however,
whether organisations can meet international employee
expectations and adapt their offering in order to be competitive
on an international basis is the question. We’ve already seen
some organisations across France unable to match salaries
on offer across Germany, Switzerland and the UK, which has
resulted in a loss of talent in some areas. If organisations are to
compete in what could become an international war for talent
they will need review their offering accordingly.
With talent in high demand organisations must prepare for
the fact that they could lose their employees to overseas
competitors, particularly when we consider the high numbers
of employees in 2013 who said they’d be willing to consider
international opportunities. Retention policies are therefore
more important than ever if firms plan to retain their best talent
and safeguard their organisation’s competitiveness.
93.3%
46.7%
26.7%
Within Europe
US
Asia Pac
Medical Devices
Within Europe
US
Asia Pac
Pharma & Biotech
Where would you consider relocating?
European employee perspective 2013
Which regions would you consider recruiting talent from?
93.2%
55.3%
40.6%
Within Europe
US
Asia Pac
33.3%
53.3%
93.3%

Drawing on international talent
When we look at the reasons firms are considering, or are
already recruiting internationally, we see that a lack of local
talent is indeed a key driver for 53.3% of medical devices
organisations and 42.2% of pharma & biotech companies.
Perhaps more significantly though 57.8% of pharma &
biotechs view sourcing talent internationally not only as a way
of addressing a shortage of local talent but also as a way to
access a much wider pool of talent; effectively extending their
options when it comes to the experience and skill sets they
want to bring into the company.
In the UK, although initially surprised by the high willingness of
employees to relocate, our roundtable said the close proximity
of countries within Europe and the ease of movement between
countries means an international relocation within Europe isn’t
as daunting for employees as it may first appear. They also
welcomed talent from further afield; seeing it as an advantage
to bring in people with international experience.
For 80.0% of medical devices organisations access to
international experience is by far the biggest motivation
for sourcing talent internationally. This is reflective of the
greater demand for people with international and complex
project and market experience, as organisations look to
bring people on-board with the skills and experience to
support expansion into new territories as companies look
to capitalise on their existing product lines and maximise
their market reach.
Why would you consider recruiting international talent?
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
%
57.8
44.4
42.2 42.2
8.9
4.4
33.3 33.3
53.3
80.0
20.0
13.3
Wider talent
pool
Lower
recruitment costs
Access to new
skill sets
Lack of
local talent
Unable to compete
locally for talent
Access
international
experience
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
A lackof local talent is
leading organisations to look
internationally for talent.”

If not, why not?
Considering that over half of the organisations in our European
panel felt a lack of local talent was a key recruitment challenge
they faced, it’s worthwhile understanding why almost a third
(30.6%) of pharma & biotechs and over a quarter (26.9%) of
medical devices organisations felt they were ‘unlikely’ or would
‘never’ recruit international talent. For the medical devices
organisations we spoke to the overwhelming preference for
employing local talent (85.7%) underpinned the reluctance to
look overseas, a feeling that was shared by 59.1% of pharma
& biotech organisations.
This feeling aside though, it appears that some organisations
remain cautious about the potential challenges of language
barriers with 42.9% of medical devices firms and 36.4%
of pharma & biotechs voicing concerns in this area. At our
Germany roundtable we heard from some organisations who
felt German language skills were critical; ‘My clients are all
based in Germany, so I need German speaking employees’.
But others disagreed stating; ‘English language skills are
important in an international organisation such as ours where
our business language is English, but ultimately I don’t care
where my employees are from, it’s about their ability to do
the role. We also offer our employees language courses –
both German and English so we should never see this as a
prohibitive factor if they are the right person for the job.’
The other reasons for not recruiting internationally tend to
focus on the apparent differences between regions and
potential areas in which skills may be lacking; for instance
a ‘lack of knowledge surrounding local regulations’ (31.8%
pharma & biotech and 28.6% medical devices). The perceived
cost of international recruitment also appears to be a concern
for almost a third of organisations across the sectors.
Our panel recognised that in an increasingly global
marketplace, with many organisations expanding into new
territories, expecting all employees to speak one common
language and have a common frame of reference has the
potential to severely limit the impact of international talent
on their company and them leave them potentially unable to
compete globally.
Why are you unlikely to recruit international talent?
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
%
36.4
31.8 31.8
22.7
18.2
59.1
4.5
9.1
42.9
28.6 28.6 28.6
85.7
0.0 0.0 0.0
Language
barrier
Lack of
transferable
qualifications
Lack of
knowledge
surrounding
regulations
Cultural
differences
Cost of
recruitment
Unable to
compete with
international
salaries/benefits
Unsure where
to look
Prefer to employ
local talent
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
With almost three quarters (74.2%) of European employees in
2013 saying they would be willing to leave their current job for
the right opportunity, retention has the potential to become a
real issue for organisations across the industry.
Even with a backdrop of potential international migration,
competition for talent and a workforce with increasingly
high expectations and demands, it’s maybe surprising that
a relatively low number of organisations we spoke to were
either ‘concerned’ (15.3% pharma & biotechs and 11.5%
medical devices firms) or ‘very concerned’ (5.6% and 3.8%
respectively) about losing their best people. In fact, confidence
across both sectors appears high with more than half of
pharma & biotechs (55.5%) and medical devices organisations
(53.9%) stating they are either ‘confident’ or ‘very confident’
about retaining their strongest talent.
Misplaced confidence?
The picture we see emerging is that this level of confidence is
based on the level of movement organisations have seen over
the past year. With 70.0% of pharma & biotechs and 64.3% of
medical devices organisations stating their staff churn levels
are low, we see again that talent movement has yet to reach
its anticipated levels. However, employers should be cautious
about using historic churn levels to predict their ability to retain
their talent moving forward and should not assume no further
actions are required to retain their best people.
Somewhat surprisingly, one of the main reasons
companies feel retention is not an issue is that they feel
their organisation ‘offers competitive salary/financial
packages’ (57.5% pharma & biotech and 57.1% medical
devices firms). This confidence could be misplaced though
when we consider in 2013 just 18.3% of European
employees said they were satisfied with their current
financial package and this was the reason they were
staying in their current role. This could perhaps suggest a
major disconnect between what employees think they are
worth and what employers think they are worth, which
could have major implications for companies as the market
becomes increasingly competitive. In fact, we saw the first
signs of that disconnect last year when 88.6% of
employees told us salary was the key factor in their
decision making process when looking for a new role and
would be their main motivation to leave.
This level of employer confidence surrounding salaries is
not shared universally though. In fact, we see two groups
emerging; those organisations who are demonstrating high
levels of confidence in their ability to offer competitive
salary and financial packages, and a second group who
feel unable to compete with the salaries and benefits
offered elsewhere, and as a result are concerned about
their current ability to retain an effective workforce.
Paying attention to retention
Currently, how confident are you about retaining your best people?
Very confident
Very confident
Confident
Concerned
Neither confident
nor concerned
Neither confident
nor concerned
Confident
Concerned
Very concerned
Very concerned
45.8%23.6%15.3%5.6%
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
7.7%46.2%30.8%11.5%3.8%
9.7%

Confidence surrounding organisations’ current ability to
retain talent was not just focused around salary and financial
packages though, in fact, many employers are confident about
their offering across a number of areas, including offering
competitive flexible benefits and work/life balance (55.0%
pharma & biotech and 57.1% medical devices), training and
development opportunities (47.5% pharma & biotech and
57.1% medical devices) and good promotion prospects
(47.5% pharma & biotech and 42.9% medical devices).
One employer at our Germany roundtable highlighted; ‘In my
opinion, retention is not centred around financial incentives
alone. No one changes jobs just because he/she earns 200€
more somewhere else.’ Similarly one participant at our UK
roundtable suggested: ‘People aren’t just leaving for salary
but for a better scope of role and to acquire new skill sets.
Work/life balance is also proving key’.
This shift in employer perceptions instils confidence that
organisations are beginning to understand the full breadth of
their employees needs and are adapting their retention policies
accordingly.
Long-term confidence
Despite only 20.9% of pharma & biotechs and 15.3% of
medical devices companies expressing concerns about their
current ability to retain their best people, it would appear that
organisations are more confident about short-term retention than
they are about the long-term. This is particularly evident when we
consider that 80.1% of pharma & biotechs and 53.9% of medical
devices organisations anticipate that retention will either definitely
or potentially be a concern for the future.
When we look further at the areas of concern around retention
we see the ability to retain the best people tops the list for
pharma & biotech organisations (81.0%) and is the second
biggest concern for medical devices organisations (64.3%). This
concern was mirrored by organisations at our European events
and when we asked how our participants were addressing
this we heard from our UK panel; ‘Companies are having to be
more mercenary. They identify their top talent and spend time
focusing on these people and their development. Of course there
is always a balance though, between those we consider our top
performers and the rest of our team who also have a key role to
play in our organisation’.
For medical devices organisations it is once again the threat of
competition and the ability to compete financially (71.4%) that
is the biggest concern. As we saw earlier our European medical
devices panel consider the ability to compete in this area as a
key challenge, and we’ve seen medical devices organisations
increasingly reviewing their financial offering, whilst examining
their full proposition in order to strengthen their ability to
compete.
Despite the concerns of some medical devices organisations,
we still see almost half (46.1%) of employers across the
sector stating that they do not consider retention a concern
for the future. Again when we look at the reasons behind this
confidence, we see organisations believe they have a strong
offering with three quarters of companies (75.0%) saying they
offer good training and career development, and have a good
working environment and culture. And of those organisations
confident about retaining their staff in the future, 66.7% believe
they are offering competitive financial packages. This goes
some way to suggest that those organisations that focus on
providing competitive salaries and do not undervalue this
aspect of their offering stand in good stead for the future.
36.1%
Yes
No
Maybe
Pharma &
Biotech
44.5%
Yes
No
Maybe
30.8%23.1%
46.1%
Medical Devices
Do you think retention may be a concern in
the future?
19.4%
Why are you confident about retaining your best people?
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
57.5
47.5
55.0
47.5
70.0
47.5
30.0
22.5
57.1
42.9
35.7
57.1 57.1
64.3
35.7
21.4
We offer
competitive
salaries/financial
packages
We offer good
promotion
prospects
We offer good
international
relocation
opportunities
We offer
competitive
flexible benefits
/work-life
balance
We offer good
training and
development
opportunities
We are an
employer of
choice
Our staff churn
levels are low
We have high
employee
satisfaction
levels
%

Pharma & biotech organisations appear to remain more
cautious though with only 19.4% voicing they have no future
concerns surrounding retention. However, unlike organisations
across the medical devices sector this confidence is not
primarily based on the strength of their offering, but the
company ethos. In fact, a loyal workforce was the primary
reason 71.4% of firms were confident about retaining their
workforce in the future, followed closely by high employee
satisfaction levels (64.3%).
When we asked employers what measures they’d put in place
as part of their retention policy, we saw that almost two thirds
of all organisations (66.7% pharma & biotechs and 65.4% of
medical devices firms) are actively monitoring their employee
satisfaction levels. Over half of our European panel (51.4%
pharma & biotechs and 57.7% of medical devices firms) said
they regularly review their employees and almost half (38.9%
and 46.2%) regularly benchmark their salaries and wider
financial packages. We are therefore seeing clear in-roads
being made across the industry as organisations are focusing
on their retention policies and wider employer satisfaction.
What do you anticipate your biggest areas of concern around retention will be?
100
80
60
40
20
0
%
81.0
25.9
22.4
55.2
27.6
8.6
64.3
71.4
35.7
14.314.3
7.1
Retaining the
best people
Keeping the
wrong people
Low morale Competition for
talent - based on
financial packages
Competition for
talent - based on
culture, flexible
benefits etc.
International
competition for
talent
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
As organisations across the pharma, biotech and medical
devices sectors face an increasingly competitive environment,
with factors such as global expansion, mergers & acquisitions
and the patent cliff still impacting the industry, it’s clear that the
next few years have the potential to be challenging.
The growing expectations of employees, combined with
competition for international talent and perceived skills
shortages means a strong employer proposition is more
important than ever before if organisations are to compete
and build an effective workforce for the future. However, in
a constantly evolving market only time will tell which
organisations are able to adapt their offering accordingly
and develop effective recruitment and retention strategies,
and which organisations will struggle in the months and
years to come.
Conclusion
Why are you confident retention won’t be a concern in the future?
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Pharma & Biotech
Medical Devices
64.3
66.7
75.0 75.0
25.0
33.3
50.0
57.1
50.0
42.9
71.4
64.3
We offer competitive
salaries/financial
packages
We offer good
training and career
development
opportunities
We offer a
good working
environment and
culture
We’re regarded
as an employer
of choice
Loyal workforce We have
high employee
satisfaction levels
%

32 The key to recruiting & retaining a competitive workforce
Salary and market trends
As expansion, mergers, acquisitions and competition continue to
affect the pharma, biotech and medical devices sectors we examine
the impact on recruitment, retention and salaries. Providing detailed
salary and contract rates, together with the latest industry insight, we
explore the market trends within core disciplines.
Salary and contract rates quoted are based on Real’s placement
data over the previous 12 months, together with the predictions
from our recruitment specialists in each region. Permanent salaries
quoted are gross average annual salaries, excluding bonuses and
benefits and contractor rates are quoted on an average hourly rate.
The salary rates quoted are indicative of the market only and salaries
will vary depending on a company’s size, location, the sector and an
employee’s qualifications, experience and responsibilities.

With the global outsourcing market continuing to grow at
speed, the surge of outsourcing to CROs has continued across
much of Europe. As a result the number of in-house clinical
operations roles has decreased, although we have seen
renewed demand for project and account managers to form
small in-house teams to manage the outsourcing process.
As CROs go from strength-to-strength we
have seen a number of new roles in this
area. With in-house opportunities
limited elsewhere we have therefore
seen a number of professionals
move into roles within CROs,
despite previous reluctance
to do so due to typically
lower salaries. This may be
due in part to the increased
flexibility surrounding their
offering we have seen from
CROs. In Germany, we have
seen a number of junior level
professionals join CROs,
attracted by the traineeships on
offer as organisations look to
on-board new talent and provide
long-term career development
opportunities.
Whilst the outsourcing trend continues to dominate the clinical
operations function, there has been more ‘in-sourcing’ in
some areas, including Switzerland, as organisations outsource
less to the tiger economies. Driven by the drop in the Euro,
organisations have seen less savings from outsourcing further
afield and this no longer off-sets the complexity and cost of
managing the outsourcing process. This change in focus has
led to renewed demand in some areas of clinical operations,
which is starting to push up salaries once more.
Experienced Clinical Research Assistants (CRAs) remain in high
demand throughout Europe and faced with a limited talent pool,
organisations are battling tough international competition for the
best talent. Salaries have been driven up significantly as a result.
In Germany we have seen organisations adapt their recruitment
processes as they look to on-board CRAs quickly, to avoid
missing out.
As firms look to secure a pipeline of CRAs we’ve seen demand
rise for Clinical Trials Assistants (CTAs). However, in the UK,
there has been an increasing trend for CTAs to progress into
regulatory affairs, rather than clinical operations. Organisations
are therefore faced with the challenge of encouraging talent
down the clinical operations route and we are seeing the
packages on offer increase as a result.
Organisations are not just looking to compete for talent on
financial packages alone though, across Switzerland we are
seeing organisations develop their full employer offering, which
in some cases has included more options for flexible working
and the inclusion of language courses. Similarly, in Belgium,
employers are examining the scope of the roles on offer,
together with their career development opportunities as they
look to attract the industry’s best talent.
On the whole the clinical operations market across pharma
& biotech has remained stable throughout Europe, with
pockets of high demand seen in some areas. In
addition to CRAs and CTAs, clinical operations
specialists with global and/or complex project
experience are highly sought after. Across
Europe there is demand at all stages of the
product cycle; in the UK, there has been a
surge in demand for pre-clinical specialists
and scientists as organisations are going
back to the development stage for new
products, following the failure of some new
products to reach the market as expected.
In Switzerland, where a number of phase III
projects are coming to the fore, particularly
within oncology, people with experience
in this area continue to be in demand. In
contrast, in France, demand has slowed for
people across phase II – III, instead shifting to
post-authorisation and phase IV specialists as the
demand for real life studies increases as pharma &
biotech organisations look to report back on new products.
Whilst demand for clinical operations specialists is also
high across the medical devices sector there has been little
transition of talent between the sectors due to the highly
specialised nature of the roles. With increasing legislation
surrounding medical devices, heightened by a series of recent
health scares, there is a renewed focused on clinical trials
in order to achieve new criteria to bring products to market.
Specialists with an engineering background are highly sought
after and as organisations look to bring in talent from other
industries we have seen salaries rise. The skills shortage seen
across the medical devices sector has also compounded the
strength of competition for talent.
Across both pharma & biotech and medical devices permanent
talent remains the preference of many employers as they
look to build sustainable teams. Excluding the areas of peak
demand, permanent salaries throughout Europe have remained
stable on the whole. Contract rates remain somewhat higher
than their permanent equivalents in many regions, but have
stabilised.
Whilst the previously high rates and buoyant contractor market
had attracted a number of specialists to go freelance, across
Germany there has been a marked shift in contractors seeking
permanent roles as the number of contractors now outnumber
the number of roles available. This is a trend reflected
throughout Europe as we see the split between permanent
and contract reach equilibrium once more.
Permanent Gross average annual salary, excluding bonus and benefits.
Job title UK (£) France (€) Netherlands (€) Germany (€) Switzerland (CHF) Belgium (€)
Clinical Director 80,000 120,000 110,000 130,000 155,000 110,000
Clinical Operations Manager 55,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 142,000 85,000
Clinical Operations VP 130,000 135,000 120,000 120,000 188,750 135,000
Clinical Programme Director 100,000 110,000 115,000 100,000 135,000 115,000
Clinical Project Director 82,500 106,000 115,000 125,000 178,000 125,000
Clinical Project Manager 54,000 60,000 60,000 74,063 123,680 60,000
Clinical Research Associate I 31,000 38,000 40,000 45,840 85,000 38,000
Clinical Research Associate II 35,000 39,500 45,000 52,000 91,000 42,500
Clinical Study Manager 55,000 65,000 70,000 68,520 114,000 72,000
Clinical Trial Administrator 30,500 35,000 37,000 38,000 73,600 38,500
Clinical Trial Co-ordinator 32,000 47,500 40,000 45,000 82,000 48,500
Clinical Trials Manager 47,000 60,000 63,000 50,875 122,500 60,000
Feasibility Manager 45,000 60,000 60,000 45,000 122,500 60,000
Senior Clinical Project Manager 63,500 80,000 87,500 92,500 142,300 90,000
Senior Clinical Research Associate 42,500 42,000 55,000 53,000 99,800 52,500
Contract Average hourly rate.
Clinical Director 85 - 90 82 - 88 120 - 150 120 - 150 156 - 164 100 - 115
Clinical Operations Manager 65 - 70 81 - 89 95 - 105 95 - 105 127 - 133 90 - 100
Clinical Project Director 85 - 95 120 - 140 114 - 126 110 - 130 156 - 164 95 - 125
Clinical Project Manager 60 - 65 70 - 85 70 - 85 75 - 90 127 - 133 70 - 85
Clinical Research Associate I 40 - 45 40 - 45 54 - 59 45 - 55 102 - 108 50 - 65
Clinical Research Associate II 45 - 50 42 - 47 50 - 70 50 - 60 102 - 108 60 - 70
Clinical Research Director 81 - 90 77 - 87 86 - 95 110 - 130 156 - 164 85 - 150
Clinical Research/Study Manager 60 - 65 64 - 72 79 - 87 70 - 85 98 - 103 85 - 100
Clinical Trial Administrator 20 - 25 28 - 34 57 - 63 35 - 40 107 - 113 50 - 60
Clinical Trial Co-ordinator 24 - 28 43 - 49 76 - 84 38 - 42 98 - 103 65 - 75
Clinical Trials Manager 75 - 80 75 - 90 85 - 95 75 - 90 102 - 108 75 - 95
Feasibility Manager 52 - 60 75 - 90 85 - 95 95 -105 112 - 118 85 - 95
Senior Clinical Operations Director 85 - 90 90 - 100 95 - 105 130 - 150 156 - 164 90 - 110
Senior Clinical Project Manager 65 - 75 80 - 90 81 - 89 80 - 95 127 - 133 95 - 115
Senior Clinical Research Associate 50 - 55 54 - 62 71 - 79 55 - 70 104 - 115 65 - 85
Clinical Operations
ClinicalOperations
Clinical operations
specialists with global
and/or complex project
experience are highly
sought after.”

Following a series of restructures and the downsizing of
many R&D functions across Europe last year, we are now
seeing the market stabilise. Pharma, biotech and medical
devices organisations now have a renewed strategic focus
for their R&D operations and this is translating to pockets of
growth in some areas. Whereas salaries were curbed by the
redundancies taking place we are now seeing salaries begin to
rise once more, albeit slowly.
Within pharma organisations there has been a rise in demand
for manufacturing and product specialists, particularly at the
research level. In Switzerland, we are seeing particularly high
demand for chemists, biologists and production chemists. This
demand has been driven in part by the increasing number of
FDA approvals for biologic products, which has opened the
door for other organisations to follow suit.
In turn, this has led to an increase in outsourcing to Contract
Manufacturing Organisations (CMOs) as organisations look
to investigate new products and wish to expand production
capabilities without increasing overheads. This has resulted in
a number of new opportunities for R&D specialists within the
CMO space, and has also created new demand for project
managers and co-ordinators to manage the outsourcing
process. However, whilst the number of jobs has increased,
the available talent pool has remained the same leading many
organisations to inflate salaries as they look to attract the best
talent.
For organisations unwilling or unable to increase salaries
further, particularly in Switzerland, there has been a rise
in the implementation of educational programmes and
apprenticeships as companies are keen to on-board people
Research & Development
Chief Medical Officer 140 - 170 125 - 140 90 - 100 120 - 150 190 - 210 90 - 100
Chief Scientific Officer 50 - 70 95 - 110 95 - 105 110 - 140 137 - 144 90 - 100
Clinical Scientist 30 - 40 58 - 62 69 - 77 67 - 74 88 - 92 60 - 70
Director of Therapy 95 - 130 85 - 110 95 - 105 114 - 126 132 - 138 95 - 115
Drug Discovery Project Leader 50 - 60 64 - 68 67 - 74 76 - 84 107 - 113 67 - 74
Drug Discovery Scientist 20 - 25 48 - 52 62 - 68 62 - 68 88 - 92 65 - 80
Epidemiologist 48 - 53 55 - 75 60 - 80 70 - 85 107 - 113 60 - 80
Medical Expert 70 - 95 88 - 92 73 - 81 95 - 105 107 - 113 80 - 100
Project Assistant 20 - 25 36 - 40 36 - 40 38 - 42 78 - 82 36 - 40
Project Manager: R&D 60 - 70 75 - 85 81 - 89 80 - 90 117 - 123 85 - 100
R&D Director 90 - 110 93 - 103 90 - 100 115 - 130 156 - 164 85 - 100
R&D Manager 50 - 70 86 - 95 76 - 84 90 - 105 132 - 138 85 - 100
Scientific Operations Director 60 - 70 90 - 100 90 - 100 120 - 150 156 - 164 90 - 100
Senior Research Physician 65 - 75 75 - 90 81 - 89 100 - 120 107 - 113 85 - 100
Senior Study Co-ordinator 45 - 50 64 - 66 70 - 80 50 - 60 98 - 103 70 - 80
Study Manager 50 - 55 70 - 85 81 - 89 70 - 85 98 - 103 80 - 90
Trial Co-ordinator 35 - 45 50 - 52 45 - 55 38 - 42 107 - 113 45 - 55
Research&Development
Chief Medical Officer 155,000 150,000 150,000 170,000 245,650 170,000
Chief Scientific Officer 155,000 135,000 115,000 160,000 266,300 120,000
Clinical Scientist 42,000 64,531 55,000 57,000 133,489 60,000
Director of Therapy 100,000 90,000 95,000 130,000 155,000 85,000
Drug Discovery Project Leader 38,000 58,000 60,000 68,000 112,100 57,500
Drug Discovery Scientist 52,000 49,000 47,500 50,000 120,900 48,500
Epidemiologist 67,500 80,000 75,000 90,000 126,410 80,000
Medical Expert 105,000 72,500 65,000 75,000 190,060 70,000
Project Assistant 29,000 28,000 35,000 35,000 71,000 35,000
Project Manager: R&D 60,000 65,000 65,000 92,500 114,000 65,000
R&D Director 80,000 100,000 110,000 120,000 146,222 115,000
R&D Manager 47,500 80,000 85,000 85,000 132,650 92,000
Scientific Operations Director 105,000 90,000 97,000 120,000 141,650 99,000
Senior Research Physician 55,000 75,000 71,000 78,000 155,400 78,000
Senior Study Co-ordinator 42,500 55,000 50,000 45,000 96,000 45,000
Study Manager 52,500 65,000 68,000 70,000 113,240 78,500
Trial Co-ordinator 32,500 45,000 45,000 38,000 91,550 65,000
early at a lower cost, instead providing extensive training
programmes. Firms that do so though run the risk of losing
valuable talent if they are not engaged with the employees at
the completion of their training programmes. This once again
emphasises the importance of retention strategies.
As the medical devices sector continues to grow with the
development of new, innovative products R&D engineers
and quality engineers remain in high demand. With a limited
number of engineers in the market, competition for the
best people remains fierce and organisations continue to
struggle to compete with other sectors for the right talent.
The automotive sector is a particular threat to organisations
within Germany, and employers have had to adapt their
offering to compete effectively for engineers. With that in
mind though, organisations have been unwilling to inflate
salaries and contract rates, instead developing roles that
offer a broader scope and promoting their products in
order to entice people into the company.
With high expenditure seen in R&D across the medical
devices sector, as firms look to build a continuous pipeline
of new products, opportunities within the discipline look
strong. And with growth across Europe expected to
continue at an estimated 1.6% per annum between 2014
and 2018, it is clear that the sector should be seen as a
long-term career path for R&D specialists with the right skills.

Demand for quality assurance professionals has continued to
rise across pharma & biotech, driven largely by the continued
tightening of European regulations, combined with the focus on
FDA audits which has led organisations to scale up their quality
assurance (QA) functions. We are also seeing increasing demand
across QA within medical devices following a number of product
scares which has resulted in tightening regulations moving the
sector more in-line with the pharma & biotech sector. Enhanced
knowledge of the QA process is therefore highly sought after
and we are seeing more flexibility within the medical devices
sector, particularly within the Netherlands, as organisations turn
to the pharma sector to secure QA talent with transferable skills.
Whilst the trend to bring previously outsourced QA teams back
in-house we saw last year has continued to some extent, we
have seen continued outsourcing as confidence has been
restored around the quality of work outsourced. There has also
been an increase in outsourcing to Contract Manufacturing
Organisations (CMOs) as organisations look to benefit from cost
efficiencies. This is presenting new jobs in the market, many of
which are fixed project opportunities for contractors due to the
project based nature of the work.
In Belgium, firms are using QA to optimise production and
improve manufacturing processes, and with organisations
looking for increasingly innovative production processes as a
way of improving cost efficiency there is further investment in
the QA function which is driving demand for talent.
Similarly, with organisations looking to capitalise on a pipeline of
new products and enter new markets quickly, Qualified Persons
(QPs) remain in high demand and, as we saw last year, due to
a limited number of newly qualified QPs entering the market we
have seen intense competition for the best talent. As a result
salaries have been driven up. However, that being said we
have seen some organisations looking to keep salaries stable
by taking on less experienced QPs or attracting talent through
increasing the scope of roles and reviewing their existing
benefits packages.
It’s not just salaries that are encouraging organisations to take
on more junior level QPs though. With increasing pressure on
QPs to take more risks, employers are looking for people that
are less risk adverse, able to handle greater responsibility, deal
with pressure from all sides of the business and who are willing
to adapt and respond quickly to market changes.
With demand for QPs high throughout Europe, we are now
seeing more international competition for talent, but it’s not just
the threat of international competition that pharma & biotech
organisations should be conscious of. With the implementation
of regulations stipulating compulsory QPs within medical
devices just a year away, the requirement to bring QPs
on-board is very much on the radar of many medical devices
organisations, and with a small existing talent pool these
organisations are gearing up to compete with pharma & biotech
organisations in this area. Experienced QPs with transferable
knowledge will therefore be at a premium. Similarly across the
medical devices sector we are already seeing salaries rise at a
faster pace in some areas as organisations increasingly look to
attract specialists with a pharma background.
International competition for talent has presented a particularly
challenging market for France, as organisations have been
unable to match the salaries offered in regions such as
Germany, Switzerland and the UK and have lost talent as a
result. However, whilst there is a lot of talent movement across
Europe, language barriers are still limiting movement in some
areas. In Switzerland, for example, German language skills
remain a key requirement for many organisations, making
Germany an obvious pool of new talent on which to draw from.
This international competition for talent is not just limited
to demand for QPs though. The sector has seen increasing
demand across the full QA discipline, including demand for
professionals across validation and compliance where there is
a continued shortage of talent. QA consultants with a focus on
QMC are in particular demand within the UK, as are pharma
specialists with experience within the FMCG sector.
In the UK, where there is a wealth of QA talent at the lower levels
we are seeing pharma & biotech firms are reluctant to inflate
salaries to secure more senior people, instead they are choosing
to bring talent on-board at a lower level and provide training
opportunities. This is also the case in France, where talent is
limited and organisations have had to turn their attention to less
experienced people in order to plug the shortfall. In the UK,
organisations are also introducing international development
plans to bring on new international talent, whilst reducing
recruitment costs.
As firms look to secure talent for the most sought-after roles
across all sectors we have seen both salaries and contract rates
rise across Europe. With contract roles continuing to command
higher rates than their permanent equivalents we have seen a
shift between perm and contract talent in some regions. In both
the UK and Switzerland there has been an increasing number of
permanent employees moving into contract roles, attracted by
the rates on offer and the perceived flexibility. With market
confidence high and ongoing demand for contractors,
employees appear more confident than ever about finding
their next contract. This reflects the high level of confidence
in job security we saw across the board last year.
This level of market confidence has been bolstered by the
high level of demand QA professionals are seeing for their
skill sets. Many people are now finding themselves in the
enviable position of receiving multiple offers, from a range of
employers. This rise in confidence has led many employees
to apply for more roles, and whilst many employers have
seen a rise in applications as an opportunity to select from a
wider talent pool they should bear in mind that candidates
may also be being considered at a number of other
organisations and that competition remains as high as ever.
In fact, in Switzerland, we’ve seen organisations adapt their
recruitment processes in order to bring new talent on-board
quickly.
Although competition has continued to inflate salaries and
rates across the discipline, by no means are organisations
competing on pay alone. We’re seeing many of the smaller
pharma & biotech organisations attract talent by offering
roles with more responsibility, wider scope and opportunities
for development. Similarly we are seeing a number of the
larger pharma companies examine their offering, including
defining clear routes of career progression within their
organisations. Whilst in the UK the scope of roles are being
broadened in some cases, in Switzerland some of the big
pharma companies are creating more specialist roles and
are splitting roles based on skills and the volume of work.
Quality Assurance
Compliance Manager 46,218 60,000 80,000 55,000 116,500 65,000
Engineer 37,000 40,000 50,000 62,500 102,560 47,500
Head of Compliance 70,000 80,000 79,000 95,000 146,850 75,000
Head of Quality Assurance 75,000 90,000 91,000 120,000 220,000 95,000
Head of Quality Control 60,000 80,000 87,000 88,000 135,000 83,500
Manufacturing Quality Engineer 37,500 46,000 48,000 58,000 109,850 58,500
Product Quality Engineer 34,000 46,000 50,000 60,000 93,100 54,500
Qualified Person 62,500 90,000 90,000 90,000 165,000 80,000
Quality Assurance Manager 50,000 65,000 65,000 68,248 114,000 72,500
Quality Assurance Officer 30,000 40,000 52,000 42,500 93,500 50,500
Quality Auditor 40,000 55,000 62,500 90,000 124,500 50,000
Quality Engineer 40,000 47,000 52,000 58,000 115,200 50,000
Senior Quality Specialist 42,500 68,000 59,000 80,000 124,500 63,500
Validation Consultant 42,500 42,000 52,000 60,000 117,500 46,800
Validation Engineer 35,000 44,000 50,000 55,000 111,650 50,000
Compliance Manager 50 - 60 71 - 81 75 - 85 85 - 100 107 - 113 81 - 89
Engineer 30 - 45 47 - 57 60 - 75 70 - 85 93 - 97 48 - 53
Head of Compliance 50 - 65 85 - 95 80 - 95 110 - 120 112 - 118 81 - 89
Head of Quality Assurance 85 - 100 86 - 122 85 - 95 115 - 135 146 -154 114 - 126
Head of Quality Control 40 - 56 86 - 122 85 - 95 110 - 120 117 - 123 114 - 126
Manufacturing Quality Engineer 35 - 42 62 - 73 65 - 70 75 - 90 98 - 103 71 - 79
Product Quality Engineer 33 - 38 62 - 73 65 - 70 80 - 100 93 - 97 71 - 79
Qualified Person 85 - 140 80 - 110 100 - 150 115 - 135 117 - 123 95 - 105
Quality Assurance Manager 65 - 85 80 - 110 80 - 110 100 - 110 117 - 123 100 - 110
Quality Assurance Officer 25 - 35 45 - 60 45 - 60 45 - 60 98 - 103 45 - 60
Quality Auditor 45 - 60 75 - 85 75 - 85 76 - 84 107 - 113 75 - 85
Quality Engineer 44 - 55 62 - 73 50 - 75 70 - 85 117 - 123 71 - 79
Senior Quality Specialist 50 - 65 80 - 100 80 - 100 115 - 130 107 - 113 100 - 110
Validation Consultant 40 - 52 60 - 70 50 - 75 86 - 95 127 - 133 81 - 89
Validation Engineer 40 - 60 57 - 62 50 - 75 76 - 84 132 -138 67 - 74
QualityAssurance

As the pipeline of new products generated off the back of
the patent cliff have started to reach the market, demand
for regulatory affairs specialists within the pharma & biotech
sector across Europe has grown significantly. This pipeline
has been bolstered not only by a number of new generic
products but also a rise in the number of biologics
entering the market, following a rise in FDA
approvals. Similarly, within medical
devices there has been rising demand
for regulatory affairs specialists as
firms look to not only release new,
innovative products but to also
expand the reach of existing
product lines through entering
the US market and therefore
require additional resources to
gain the necessary approvals.
There have also been some
significant shifts in the industry
as a whole, with small biotechs
being bought up by some of
the larger pharmas. In the UK
these mergers and acquisitions,
both across pharma & biotech and
the medical devices sector, have led to
redundancies at all levels in some areas.
Similarly, in France mergers and acquisitions have
led to an increasing number of qualified specialists
re-entering the job market.
However, with a declining number of long-term contract
roles on offer we are seeing a surplus of talent who are left
with limited options. As a result we have seen these people
either looking for opportunities elsewhere in Europe, or in
some cases considering a career move. Elsewhere, including
Switzerland, organisational change has included splitting roles
to become more specialist which has resulted in organisations
adapting their structures and processes.
As restructures take place there has been an increasing
reliance on contractors to provide short-term support, which
has led to a number of new jobs. These new opportunities,
together with the attractive rates on offer and the perceived
benefits of more flexible working, has led to an increasing
number of people looking to move into the contract/interim
market. This is particularly evident in France, where the
contract market has grown significantly from the demand
seen last year. It’s not just contract opportunities that are
being created by this period of organisational change though,
in some cases full new senior management teams are being
brought on board which has driven demand at the very senior
level across regulatory affairs. Demand for permanent
employees remains high across organisations looking
to build sustainable teams for the long-term.
In addition to restructures and M&As,
the outsourcing trend seen last year
has continued to gain momentum.
Outsourcing to CROs has resulted
in some regulatory affairs in-house
teams becoming defunct in the UK,
however, this is bringing increasing
opportunities for those willing to work
in the commercial environment of the
CROs and also a rise in the number of
project management roles as firms look
for people to manage the outsourcing
process. Outsourcing has included
disciplines such as publishing, CMS and
maintenance work. Whilst organisations are
utilising the skills of third party suppliers across
Europe, there is also an increasing reliance on
providers within the emerging markets, including areas
within Asia Pac as firms seek to reduce their costs.
As firms look to manage third party relationships globally and
look to extend product lines to new territories, people with
global experience are highly sought after throughout Europe
– particularly within smaller organisations where the scope of
roles is often much broader. Those with this experience are
often able to command higher salaries as a result.
Whilst organisations are looking at financial packages to
attract the best talent, on the whole rates are fairly stable
throughout Europe. Instead firms are evaluating their employer
proposition and tailoring their offering. For example in the UK
we have seen increasing flexibility around home working, sign
on bonuses and a renewed focus on scoping out clear routes
for career progression. Similarly, in Germany organisations are
looking at the range of additional benefits on offer, and in some
cases are offering to cover relocation costs in order to bring in
the right talent.
Regulatory Affairs
Head of Regulatory Affairs 115,000 130,000 100,000 102,000 140,000 125,000
Regulatory Affairs Associate 36,000 50,000 50,000 47,500 96,850 50,000
Regulatory Affairs Director 100,000 90,000 95,000 120,000 160,000 100,000
Regulatory Affairs Manager 63,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 120,800 70,000
Regulatory Affairs Pharmacist 32,000 54,000 55,000 55,000 90,520 50,000
Regulatory Associate Director 88,000 85,000 110,000 110,000 140,000 104,000
Regulatory Principal Officer /
Regulatory Project Manager
58,000 67,000 70,000 85,000 110,400 65,000
Regulatory Publisher 36,000 47,500 50,000 50,000 90,100 50,000
Regulatory Publishing Manager /
Operations Manager
60,000 60,000 75,000 70,000 100,000 70,000
Regulatory Senior Manager 73,000 85,000 85,000 90,000 128,550 82,000
Regulatory Senior Officer 57,000 65,000 65,000 80,000 103,000 60,000
Regulatory Senior Publisher 52,000 52,000 55,000 58,000 87,500 60,000
Regulatory Writer 40,000 42,500 45,000 50,000 96,840 45,000
Senior Director Regulatory 105,000 110,000 130,000 135,000 175,000 135,000
VP Regulatory 145,000 135,000 140,000 160,000 185,000 140,000
Head of Regulatory Affairs 75 - 90 140 - 175 120 - 150 110 - 125 180 - 250 100 - 125
Regulatory Affairs Associate 45 - 50 40 - 60 40 - 60 40 - 50 90 - 109 40 - 60
Regulatory Affairs Director 80 - 100 120 - 180 110 - 150 130 - 150 180 - 200 100 - 125
Regulatory Affairs Manager 60 - 75 88 - 92 80 - 110 80 - 95 100 - 170 85 - 115
Regulatory Affairs Pharmacist 30 - 40 55 - 65 60 - 80 70 - 90 100 - 140 70 - 90
Regulatory Affairs Writer 48 - 53 64 - 70 40 - 60 60 - 80 75 - 110 70 - 85
Regulatory Associate Director 68 - 72 100 - 120 120 - 150 110 - 125 156 - 164 100 - 120
Regulatory Principal Officer /
Regulatory Project Manager
54 - 56 70 - 75 80 - 100 85 - 100 100 - 140 65 - 75
Regulatory Publisher 49 - 51 48 - 52 40 - 50 70 - 90 127 - 133 65 - 75
Regulatory Publishing Manager /
Operations Manager
58 - 62 67 - 73 40 - 50 80 - 95 120 - 170 85 - 95
Regulatory Senior Manager 63 - 67 85 - 94 80 - 110 90 - 110 120 - 170 95 - 110
Regulatory Senior Officer 49 - 51 65 - 70 60 - 80 85 - 100 136 - 144 55 - 65
Regulatory Senior Publisher 60 - 70 60 - 65 40 - 50 90 - 110 75 - 110 70 - 85
Senior Director Regulatory 78 - 82 130 - 150 100 - 120 130 - 150 160 - 190 115 - 135
VP Regulatory 97 - 103 150 - 190 120 - 150 130 - 150 205 - 230 115 - 125
Demand for
permanent employees
remains high across
organisations looking to
build sustainable teams
for the long-term.”
RegulatoryAffairs


Demand for
permanent employees
remains high across
France and Switzerland.”
Following a number of health scares and increasingly stringent
regulations, pharmacovigilance is firmly at the centre of
many pharma & biotech organisations’ agendas. This has
led to increasing demand for specialists in this area, as firms
look to embed pharmacovigilance and drug safety at the
development phase.
In France and Switzerland demand is high for permanent
employees, as organisations look to bring people on-board
to work on long-term projects. FDA audits and the urgency of
projects is driving demand for contractors and in France, in
particular, there has been a rise in the number of contractors
organisations are recruiting in order to address potential issues.
Organisations are also seeing the benefits of offering temp to
perm positions, as this provides the flexibility of getting talent
on-board quickly with the option of securing people down the
line on a permanent basis. This is inflating salaries to some
extent as employees seek salaries that are competitive with
their contractor rate.
That being said, in Germany demand at the lower levels
has slowed as firms look to outsource these roles, including
data and case processing roles, to third parties, both within
Germany and overseas. This lull in demand follows a boom
last year and suggests that many organisations were
forward-thinking and met their future requirements. In
Germany, we therefore see more highly qualified people
competing for the same roles, which has kept salaries static.
In contrast, in pockets of Europe, including Switzerland, the
talent pool is somewhat limited which means competition
for talent has remained high. This has pushed salaries up as
organisations are willing to pay more for people with the right
skills. Those organisations that are unwilling, or unable, to
inflate salaries are increasingly looking internationally for talent.
Pharmacovigilance & Drug Safety
Associate Director 70,000 80,000 82,500 120,000 145,000 90,000
Director PVG 120,000 98,000 90,000 130,000 190,000 105,000
Drug Safety Officer 35,438 51,000 45,000 98,090 94,000 50,000
Global Safety Physician 100,000 100,000 75,000 100,000 210,000 100,000
Medical Information Head 80,000 75,000 80,000 98,000 156,000 85,000
Medical Information Officer 45,000 65,000 70,000 70,000 115,000 70,000
Medical QPPV or Medical
Director
120,000 120,000 95,000 120,000 220,500 111,000
Pharmacovigilance Associate 30,000 48,000 45,000 50,000 88,000 48,000
Pharmacovigilance Director 75,000 98,000 78,500 140,000 138,000 120,000
Pharmacovigilance Manager 50,000 68,000 65,000 75,000 119,000 70,000
Pharmacovigilance Officer 33,750 38,000 45,000 42,500 102,400 50,000
Pharmacovigilance Physician 70,000 105,000 95,000 75,000 139,800 85,000
Pharmacovigilance Senior
Physician
85,000 82,500 100,000 90,000 180,000 90,000
PV Auditor 60,000 67,500 60,000 85,000 132,000 65,000
Associate Director 70 - 100 80 - 95 100 - 120 90 - 110 175 - 185 100 - 125
Director PVG 90 - 100 95 - 115 80 - 120 100 - 130 175 - 185 115 - 135
Drug Safety Officer 30 - 40 39 - 46 40 - 60 70 - 100 117 - 123 80 - 90
Global Safety Physician 140 - 150 68 - 77 70 - 90 100 - 140 117 - 123 110 - 135
Medical QPPV or Medical
Director
140 - 160 110 - 125 100 - 120 120 - 150 146 - 154 115 - 135
Pharmacovigilance Associate 25 - 35 42 - 48 80 - 90 45 - 65 107 - 113 70 - 80
Pharmacovigilance Director 90 - 110 100 - 115 80 - 110 100 - 120 175 - 185 95 - 125
Pharmacovigilance Manager 50 - 60 58 - 65 80 - 100 70 - 100 127 - 133 90 - 100
Pharmacovigilance Officer 30 - 40 35 - 40 60 - 80 70 - 100 117 - 123 80 - 90
Pharmacovigilance Physician 125 - 135 42 - 50 70 - 90 100 - 140 155 - 175 95 - 115
Manager
60 - 70 68 - 78 60 - 80 70 - 100 151 - 159 95 - 115
Physician
130 - 140 59 - 66 80 - 95 100 - 140 117 - 123 110 - 135
Pharmacovigilance&DrugSafety
Temp to permpositions are offering organisations
increasing flexibility, although inflating salaries to some extent. ”

Medical Affairs
With a pipeline of new products, including an increasing number
of biologics, achieving phase II and III approvals there has been
slow but steady growth across the medical affairs function,
throughout much of Europe which has led to growing demand for
medical affairs professionals. This increase in roles has proved an
encouraging sign for many people, and whilst we saw a number
of specialists in the Netherlands moving out of medical affairs to
commercial roles last year, we are now seeing this trend reversed
with many people now re-entering the medical affairs arena.
Salaries are therefore stabilising as a result.
Demand remains high for Medical Science Liaisons (MSLs)
across Europe, although the majority of this demand is
driven by movements between organisations, rather than the
creation of new roles. This high demand across all regions,
combined with a limited talent pool has created intense
competition for the best people. In Germany, salaries have
been driven up as organisations look to
match the high salaries on offer at
medical institutes. But employers
aren’t competing on salaries
alone; across both Germany
and France organisations are
becoming more flexible about
the educational background
of MSLs they are recruiting
and in Germany we see
employers offering flexibility
around home working and
a better work/life balance in
order to attract talent from the
medical institutes.
Medical advisors with clinical
experience are also in demand in
both Germany and the UK. However,
with employee expectations and
demands higher than ever before movements
between organisations are limited as people show
reluctance to move roles without securing a higher salary or
promotion. This is driving up salaries to some degree as firms
look to secure talent in an increasingly limited and competitive
market. Medical affairs directors are also increasingly sought
after in the UK, with a growing number of companies also
looking to secure directors for their expanding overseas
operations. Demand has also remained particularly high across
Switzerland, with many of the big pharma headquarters looking
to bolster their medical affairs teams.
Bucking the trend seen across much of Europe, Belgium
has seen lower levels of demand across the medical affairs
function. This is due in part to the reduction in new products
seen across Belgium, following reduced investment in R&D
and therefore less need for specialists in the medical affairs
space. Salaries have therefore remained largely static and
competition has remained strong for the best roles.
Throughout the UK the General Medical Council (GMC)
qualification stipulations are having a significant impact on
those working within medical affairs. With new regulations
stating that medical affairs specialists need to be GMC
certified and with many higher level professionals lacking
this qualification, but reluctant to undertake the two
year training required, there are a number of
experienced, non-medical, senior managers who
have found their job opportunities curtailed.
As a result a number of these managers are
moving across into MSL roles, often for
lower salaries, although we have seen an
increasing tendency for these managers to
look internationally for other opportunities
instead.
On the whole demand remains high
for permanent employees, both across
pharma & biotech and medical devices, with
organisations looking to build teams that can
grow with the organisation over time. That being
said, there is still a market for contractors and
due to the higher rates on offer this is proving an
attractive option for many people. This has led to rising
competition for contract roles, and faced with this high level
of competition we are seeing some contractors moving over to
permanent roles.
Across the medical devices sector it is medical affairs
specialists with a technical background that are proving the
most highly sought after, as employers look for people with the
skill sets to work closely with technicians and NPD teams.
Chief Medical Officer 170,000 175,000 160,000 220,000 250,000 175,000
Chief Scientific Officer 150,000 150,000 140,000 170,000 156,800 150,000
Clinical Research Physician 55,000 60,000 70,000 75,000 165,000 70,000
Director of Therapy Area 110,000 100,000 90,000 90,000 154,650 90,000
Head of Medical Affairs 95,000 105,000 110,000 128,333 230,000 105,000
Head of Medical Liaison 75,000 95,000 80,000 97,500 148,760 92,500
Medical Advisor 65,000 85,000 72,000 90,000 137,666 81,880
Medical Affairs Manager 85,000 95,000 81,500 102,500 115,325 92,500
Medical Director 120,000 120,000 100,000 130,000 198,546 107,500
Medical Information 40,000 55,000 69,000 75,000 107,000 55,000
Medical Science Liaison 55,000 75,000 70,000 98,333 123,650 65,000
R&D Medical Director 110,000 107,500 100,000 120,000 210,300 110,000
Scientific Advisor 58,000 80,000 75,000 75,000 124,600 75,000
Senior Medical Advisor 78,000 100,000 75,000 100,000 145,000 95,000
Collaboration Manager 67 - 74 80 - 90 86 - 95 78 - 90 115 - 140 81 - 89
Head of Medical Affairs 130 - 150 110 - 120 86 - 95 120 - 150 171 - 179 95 - 105
Head of Medical Information 60 - 70 105 - 110 85 - 100 90 - 120 156 - 164 95 -110
Head of Medical Liaison 100 - 110 90 - 100 85 - 93 100 - 130 127 - 133 81 - 89
Medical Affairs Advisor 120 - 130 80 - 88 74 - 82 80 - 100 107 - 113 114 - 126
Medical Affairs Manager 100 - 110 98 - 115 41 - 45 80 - 100 127 - 133 105 - 116
Medical Director 130 - 150 100 - 110 76 - 84 105 - 125 146 - 154 71 - 79
Medical Information 40 - 50 62 - 68 71 - 79 95 - 110 98 - 103 95 - 105
Medical Science Liaison 50 - 70 75 - 80 73 - 81 86 - 105 88 - 92 84 - 92
Scientific Advisor 50 - 70 95 - 110 70 - 80 80 - 100 132 -138 85 - 100
Senior Medical Affairs Advisor 135 - 145 110 - 120 80 - 90 100 - 130 136 - 144 100 - 125
Senior Medical Information 45 - 55 80 - 90 80 - 95 80 - 100 112 - 118 85 - 100
MedicalAffairs
Salaries have
remained largely
static and competition
has remained strong
for the best roles.”

Recruiting Retaining a Competitive Workforce

Recruiting Retaining a Competitive Workforce

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Recruiting Retaining a Competitive Workforce

Similar to Recruiting Retaining a Competitive Workforce (20)

Recruiting Retaining a Competitive Workforce